Sick of lego license's

[Jo the Moe]

I dont know about you guys but im sick of these lego license's. Lets have a quick look

Star Wars

Disney

Avatar

Sponge Bob

Indiana Jones (possible)

Harry Potter

Thomas & Friends

Bob the Builder

Batman

Spider Man

Jurassic Park/Steven Spielberg

Isnt it ironic that a company that prides itself in thinking and CREATING makes 11 themes on franchises in less than 10 years (and its becoming more frequent). Im sorry but i hate that, and thats what drove me into my dark ages. Look at it, legos spends most of its R&D into its co-branded products because they have a steep liscense that they have to pay for, this takes out money from its own r&d which creates more or less stale products. Im sure all AFOL can agree and atest to this. Noticed how lego had its themes start to suck around 97-98 (developing SW) where as the years before (when i was just a wee kid and major lego fan) their themes ruled.

The reason why lego has been able to get away with creating subpar and down right crappy products is because they have a label that guarantees them to be sold. People will always buy things for their label, and when it has two very big labels (lego and the brand) it is bound to be sold. Look the mighty castle line of 07, even though it is a huge step up form the previous decade of castle sets, compare it to the pre-liscense lego. The royal knights, black knights, dragon masters, it pales in comparison. How about mission mars, in the face of classic ice planet, or spyrius, its downright pitiful.

However what angers me most is this latest rumour, which will most likely be true with Indy Jones 4. They are replacing the adventurers theme, with this crap. Im sorry to all indy fans, but i dont want pieces to recreate a movie scene, but rather pieces to suit my visons of making a temple or pyramid.

Does anyone else share my views?

[Brick Miner]

Isnt it ironic that a company that prides itself in thinking and CREATING makes 11 themes on franchises in less than 10 years (and its becoming more frequent).

good point.

Noticed how lego had its themes start to suck around 97-98 (developing SW) where as the years before (when i was just a wee kid and major lego fan) their themes ruled.

do not agree with this... WW, adventures, ninja are some of the best LEGO themes EVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

However what angers me most is this latest rumour, which will most likely be true with Indy Jones 4. They are replacing the adventurers theme, with this crap.

i agree, i don't want the indy license either... but wait, why would you care about the adventuers being replace... didn't you just say that the themes from 97-98 "suck"ed ???

:-P

- BrickMiner

Edited June 10, 2007 by Brick Miner

[gylman]

It's tricky.

Without Star Wars Lego, The Lego Company would not exist in its present form. It was close to financial failure, and was saved by this and by Bionicle.

I agree most of the licenses are unnecessary for AFOLs, but I think they are a good entry point for people into Lego, and then they can more on to more themes. Especially little kids who grow up on Bob the Builder, Dora, and definitely Thomas for example.

I think the Batman theme has been a disappointment, but maybe it it had been done better it woudl have been worthwhile. Similarly Spiderman. Potter had some good sets, but too many klunkers.

Juracic Park was a total loss, Avatar too. Disney? I have seen a couple of Mickey/Minnie sets, but they never had a significant presence

I DEEPLY regret an Indiana Jones license if it means the end of the Adventurers. That would be absolutely a terrible mistake for long term, because Indy Jones is not a long term franchise.

So, it's a mixed bag. Like anything else, not black and white. Bottom line is that the people at TLC are not stupid, and they do a LOT of market research, and they have turned things around a LOT from a few years ago, so I cut them a lot of slack.

Except for the old gray thing. No slack for that at all. :-(

And if they kill the Adventurers....

[Norrington]

Well, I don't have a problem with liscenses, but the fleshie think is the only thing I dislike because interesting heads can't be mixed with ther figs because of the skin-tone.

[5150 Lego]

It's tricky.

I agree most of the licenses are unnecessary for AFOLs, but I think they are a good entry point for people into Lego, and then they can more on to more themes. Especially little kids who grow up on Bob the Builder, Dora, and definitely Thomas for example.

Absolutly great point glyman! Joe it looks like your thinking from an AFOF point of veiw and not a kids. Sorry, but worked 15 years ago isn't going to work today. With all the differnt cartoons and what not to relate to kids, its just natural for lego to take a chunk of the action.

[Hinckley]

However what angers me most is this latest rumour, which will most likely be true with Indy Jones 4.

Anger is the path to the dark side.

Welcome to EB, Jo. I'm Mark. If you can't tell if I'm joking or not, I am. Glad you're here.

I like the licenses just because they bailed LEGO out of some financial problems they got into in the late 90's when electronic toys started dominating the market. And while everything has a negative and positive side, I mostly enjoy the licensed theme. They brought us out of the juniorization era and have provided some very cool mini-figs.

The Star Wars license brought me out of my dark ages. Sorry the licenses put you into your dark ages. I'm glad your back in time for the Cafe Corner, Hobby Train and the cool new castle!

[Kishin]

Most children today do not have the imagination that many pressent day adults did as children. TV,Video games and the Internet have somewhat caused it to diminish. Before kids had to come up with things to do, now its just there in front of them. So most kids want the creative process done for them, which basically means getting LEGOs based on various popular brands. As long as the licences support our beloved TLG enough to keep them making sets them I am ok with it. Both sides end up winning as kids get sets based around what they want while us creative FOLs can use those licensed sets and use them to build something unique :-)

Just my .02 cents *y*

[Starwars4J]

Sorry, but [what] worked 15 years ago isn't going to work today. With all the differnt cartoons and what not to relate to kids, its just natural for lego to take a chunk of the action.

I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Other toy brands stick to the same old same old and are still doing brilliantly. Playmobile, for example, has changed very little from when I was a child, but they're doing well, even without licenses. They're also doing pretty much every theme AFOLs want...I just wish Lego would take a clue from them :-/

As for more licenses, I'll get over it. I can always use more fleshies for the heads of the damned >:-) It's the only place I use them...

I don't really mind licenses, as long as Lego has a nice supplement of their own lines, however them taking over the roles of their original sets (such as Indiana Jones with Adventurers, and to a limited extent Star Wars with space...as Mission Mars is doing well with children), is something I just cannot abide by. I just hope they can find a nice balance between the more expensive license sets, and cheaper sets for everyone with an imagination X-D

[Kishin]

I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Other toy brands stick to the same old same old and are still doing brilliantly. Playmobile, for example, has changed very little from when I was a child, but they're doing well, even without licenses. They're also doing pretty much every theme AFOLs want...I just wish Lego would take a clue from them :-/

I do not think Playmobil could pull off licences, even if they wanted to, they are basically Action Figure Playsets, and their are already Star Wars and other types of figures out there.

Edited June 11, 2007 by Kishin

[gylman]

It's a bit hard to compare PlayMo and Lego. There are some similarities between the two, but important differences.

Playmobile: 379 M annual sales in 2006, 2721 employees

Lego: 1000 M annual sales in 2006, 4900 employees

(all amounts in Euro, I converted the DKK)

Lego, being significantly bigger, has to have more irons in the fire at a single time in order to keep moving. Playmobile is more of a niche toy, and I have to say that my impression is that it is waning, at least in Canada, although I cannot say for Europe or US.

Also, it looks like Playmobile is much more Eurocentric than Lego - the culture of toys is probably different between the US and Europe. In the future, I would predict that toy culture in developing Asia (China, India) which is a site of potential growth, would be much more like the US than like Europe. How strong is Playmobile in Japan and Singapore and HK? I don't honestly know, just asking...

[5150 Lego]

I'm afraid I couldn't disagree more. Other toy brands stick to the same old same old and are still doing brilliantly. Playmobile, for example, has changed very little from when I was a child, but they're doing well, even without licenses. They're also doing pretty much every theme AFOLs want...I just wish Lego would take a clue from them :-/

Well, Playmobile might still be around, but i wouldn't say there doing well. Iv'e seen the same 2 sets on the shelf of target and TRU for the last 2 years. At least here in the U.S. Maybe because they haven't changed in years is because of that. Again, also they might be doing what AFOL want, but not nessasarly what kids want. My nephew has some megga blocks because he loves the POTC movies. He could care less if its lego, or megablocks. Its the fact that there POTC. I've tried to get him regualar lego pirtates, but he'll choose the megablocks every time just because of the name. I'm also a big Catapilar Tractor fan. I know that megablocks has a Cat lisense, but i won't stupe to that level! :-P But if they did have that lisence.... I'd be in heaven!

Me myself, i don't mind licenses (as you can see). I don't see anything wrong with them. If it helps apeal to certain audiances, then why not? Somone already made a good point, that kids today just don't have the imagination that kids had years ago. I think that its just differnt generations. Lego sees this, and is changing to suite with the times. Could they have sticked with there guns and just kept to there roots? Maybe. But like gylman said Starwars hepled them from becoming bankedrupt. Why? Cause not only kids can relate to Starwars, but AOLF and even people that never would have bought lego. Just plain Starwars fans. This can also be said for any lisence. Lets take ferrari for example.

I know quite a few people that have purchased ferrari sets that have never played with lego because there huge ferrari fans. For some of these people it introduced them to lego, and know they are coloctors of all types of lego. Nothing wrong with that right?

[Starwars4J]

Of course not, afterall like I said I enjoy both! I'm a star wars fan, however the higher prices due to licensing fees keep me from buying them in bulk. I find that their own sets, which have a higher value in bricks/dollar are much better for figs and parts packs. There's nothing wrong with licenses (outside of the higher prices and...fleshie heads :-X ), I just prefer them to not replace their own themes entirely with licenses.

It should also be noted that Star Wars is the exception rather than the rule, no other license has done nearly so well. That being said, they also seem to put more effort into their SW sets lately (introduction of the UCS, including the newest falcon just as an example) than they do for other sets like their newest space line.

Licenses have their place, just...not as the dominating force. It's great because it combines two things for an adult: a current love with their past of building lego. And Lego is banking on the idea that in that process, the adult will rediscover their love for the brick. That however leads to problems since it's so radically different than it was, but they're doing well so far.

Personally I have no problem with Harry Potter, I'd just rather see classic castle. And i have no problem with Indiana Jones, I'd just rather see adventurers (although if the heads were yellow and the sets were normal price I'm sorry to say I might enjoy IJ moreso).

[Jo the Moe]

Your right brick miner, adventureers were awesome, which is why i got so angered when i saw the indy 4 lego rumour

Also kids have been buying starwars toys for over 30 years, barbie for 40, tnmnt for 20, batman for 30 or so. people will buy the same brand so i disagree with you on that 5150

Edited June 11, 2007 by Jo the Moe

[5150 Lego]

Um, i don't quite understand what you meant buy that Joe. I understand that people have a strong following to certain toys. I'm not saying that if legos didn't have licenses no one would buy them, but they certaintly have helped.

[robbo]

I really have to disagree with you here joe. If it wasnt for the star wars licence i would not be here. Since the Star Wars licence began i have spent at least $25,000 AUD on lego and thats not just on star wars. My wallet has taken an absolute pounding from city, castle, 9 volt trains, Remote trains,vikings even Batman, Spiderman and Harry Potter.

Anyways, great topic and welcome.

[snefroe]

i can hardly be accused of being a fan of licenses. still, Star wars is by far the biggest line of Lego in the last 10 years. It may not have sold in massive numbers year after year, but it surely saved the company from getting taken over by a bigger player on the market when Lego was in financial trouble. it cannot be stressed enough that sw brought in an entirely new group of fans, the afols. Sure, the number of people may be fairly small compared to the traditional market, but it's a financially powerfull group, not to mention the fact that most of the internet activity (like basically all the websites) is/was set up by Afols...

on the other hand, many other licenses are crap. Frst, many sets are playability sets, not really in the interest of afols; they're short lived and very often don't seem to go anywhere, like batman and spiderman. How can you expect people to start collecting batman, if the collection will never ever reach more than 8-10 sets? Consequently, there's no fanbase, just the casual consumer who likes batman and buys a set or two. also, they're very expensive compared to normal lego sets and they're making Lego dependent on a partner. They do not decide when sets are getting released, probably do not decide what sets to build,...

still, kids are far more demanding then ever before. For instance, we used to build an xwing in the 80s with lego parts. it didn't look like the real thing at all, we just did the best we could... Nowadays, kids want the real thing, the wouldn't be happy with the xwing we made, they'd want something that looks waaaaay better than that. sure Lego can easily do that, but probably not without risking a lawsuit for violating copyrights, the way-out would be to get a license...

you cannot ignore the huge impact from media/hollywood culture on kids. they don't create barriers in the way they see things. after having seen POTC they'll go straight to their Lego box, they'll pick up a minifig which, in their mind, is Sparrow, and they will very often just replay the film, maybe with variations, but in the end, they'll keep the main characters. as with the xwing example, they'll not be happy with a classic smiling head or a substitute, they'll want a Jack sparrow head. Lego has accepted that a substitute for batman would have been nonsense, so they just went after the license... They did not get the license for POTC, so they did not create a POTC theme...

Sure playmo is doing well, but they are in a different market anyway. first of all, Playmo sells waaaay better than Lego and is mainly based in Europe. They can afford to not focussing on US culture/market... second, they never bothered about themeparks, spin offs, clothing,... they're just producing traditional playmo toys, making costs extremely low, so they don't need a profit the size of Lego's.

[Brainbox]

I'm not saying that if legos didn't have licenses no one would buy them, but they certaintly have helped.

... because they've drawn other people into Lego. Perhaps people that wouldn't normally look at a Lego set, but now it's Star Wars, Batman, etc they're interested.

I agree that licneced themes are less AFOL orientated, but thats not to say AFOLs don't like them. I, fo one, love a lot of them. Star Wars and Batman especially. As a big fan of both, I loved seeing my favourite characters represented as Lego figs. Let's face it, minifigs are great anyway, and have a certain 'cute' appeal, so seeing ones favourite character(s) in Lego form is nice. My only criticism of Batman especially, is that it hasn't gone far enough. You know, there's no Jim Gordon, no Oracle, no Superman, etc.

It's not as if they can't be MOCed either. You've seen the number of UCS Star Wars and EU ships models, and people seem to have an affinity for Batmobiles. This was all done before licences, but now it can be done so much better because of the presence of figs.

I think a healthy balance should be maintained. Too many licences could be overkill, but I'm happy to see good ones continue. As long as they're iconic themes, and set design/construction stays at it's best throughout, there shouldn't be a problem. Obviously not so much now because of the flesh-tone heads, but before licences presented an opportunity for new and interesting heads.

And it's not like price is an issue over here. All Lego sets are expensive compared to certain other countries. |-/

Besides, if Lego didn't have the Star Wars licence, we'd never have got the wonderful LSW games.

Edited June 11, 2007 by Brainbox

[xwingyoda]

Yeay another rant anti licences !! I shall protect licences hehe

The best arguments are linked to SW: without SW TLC would be in serious financial difficulties + how many AFOLS came out of their dark ages tks to SW ? (I am personnally one of them ;-) )

That argument is solely to prove that licences are profitable as a general statment !!

I agree that licneced themes are less AFOL orientated, but thats not to say AFOLs don't like them. I, fo one, love a lot of them. Star Wars and Batman especially. As a big fan of both, I loved seeing my favourite characters represented as Lego figs. (...)

Besides, if Lego didn't have the Star Wars licence, we'd never have got the wonderful LSW games.

Amen to those 2 points !! Me too I love to have characters I loved on the screen as MFs !! 5and I won't even enter in SW geek mode :-P ).

I am a true fan of Batman and Spongebob !! Yes SB is a great theme with cool sets and great MFs !! Another good thing about licences is the novelty parts they include: tks to Batman we have those great pearl gold parts and tks to SB we have those green cherries *wub* (used to make Gary's eyes !!)

And Amen to that Video Games !! LSW are so fun to play its amazing and I really can't wait for that ultimate edition !! Lets not forget the upcomming Lego Batman ;-)

Sure licences have peach figs (I love those now hehe), and sure they increase the prices of sets (and yada yada yada) I think they are greatly needed if they are not too numerous and if they are well chosen.

For instance I think that an Indy license is really stupid !! Sure it will have great sets and MFs, but what annoys me is each time TLC fails to use the momentum to release unlicensed products !! They could have loaded on easy cash by releasing a new pirate line with each of the POTC instalments, and the same goes with Indy4: release a new adventurer line at that time !! G I don't count how many times wrote this |-/

Comic Books, video games and cartoons are great for licenses !!

So I will finish by... :-D

License On !!

*yoda*

[BrickBob Studpants]

I think those licenses are very important for TLC, because it's a worthing business! The Lego Star Wars games for example are the best (and best-selling ;-) ) Lego games ever made! And I wouldn't be a Lego-fan today if TLC hadn't produced Star Wars sets!

I just collect licensed themes, so I buy Star Wars-, Harry Potter-, Spiderman- (ok, not any more X-D )and SpongeBob- (best cartoon ever! :-D ) sets. I'm interested in some other themes too (I love those new castle sets *wub* ), but I don't have enough money and space for that.

I think the worst license is avatar because 2 sets aren't that great and it's quite unknown here in Europe. The other licenses are all really great (except Duplo-themes X-D )

[Brick Miner]

iit cannot be stressed enough that sw brought in an entirely new group of fans, the afols.

are we crediting the SW line to the entire formation of the AFOL hobby ???

i for one, have never bought a SW set in my life... and the only one to peak my interest (at all) was the new MTT. for me, this hobby had nothing to do with SW, and i find it hard to believe that all the members over at classic-castle and classic-pirates (;-)) got into SW first, then jumped over to castle or pirates. maybe it's true, but i doubt it.

i do get the impression that SW had something with the formation of this site though ;-)

so maybe a lot of members used SW as "the gateway theme" :-P

--------------------------------------------------

this topic kind of reminds me of the "which theme do you wish LEGO never made" thread...

just because a theme is making the company a lot of money doesn't mean the company should do it... for example, bionicle sells very well, but it also distracts from traditional, brick-and-plate building. well, imagine a hypothetical market in which bionicle made the company so much money that it out-sold SYSTEM style themes to the point where it was in the company's best interest to only produce non-brick-an-plate themes that worked cohesively with this new ball-and-joint system.

that would be terrible.

so yes, the company has to do what will make money, but i argue that it should do that within the limitations of it products. LEGO shouldn't stop producing toys, because tupperware sells better.

there are always other options...

licensing (and bionicle) could be viewed as a cop-out.

- BM

[snefroe]

are we crediting the SW line to the entire formation of the AFOL hobby ???

i for one, have never bought a SW set in my life... and the only one to peak my interest (at all) was the new MTT. for me, this hobby had nothing to do with SW, and i find it hard to believe that all the members over at classic-castle and classic-pirates (;-)) got into SW first, then jumped over to castle or pirates. maybe it's true, but i doubt it.

well i do think that sw makes up the majority of the afol community, especially in the US, even though many have moved on to other themes, which is yet another contribution of the sw license. also, it's not impossible that many afols did not buy sw sets but got back in because of it. they recognized the new attraction of lego, the parts, designs, minifigs... they were attracted by the hype that sw created... even though they decided to pick up the old themes of interest, not sw...

not sure if sw was the main thing here on eb, you'd have to ask jp, tt, and some other people here. i think the sw section/attention here on eb, compared to other sections, especially before the creation of the different forums, reflect the dominence of the theme in the afol community...

just because a theme is making the company a lot of money doesn't mean the company should do it... for example, bionicle sells very well, but it also distracts from traditional, brick-and-plate building. well, imagine a hypothetical market in which bionicle made the company so much money that it out-sold SYSTEM style themes to the point where it was in the company's best interest to only produce non-brick-an-plate themes that worked cohesively with this new ball-and-joint system.

well, i think they would and probably should if the system theme wouldn't sell/be profitable at all. Maybe they'd use a chunk of the bionicle profits to finance the system line, anyway, who'd care at that point? If bionicle takes 90% of the market or far more, then 90%+ of EB would be about bionicle. we'd probably not even care about system going down. Remember the Lego family? that was blown away by the minifig, consequently, lego droped the line all together, even though a generation had grown up with the those sets...

let's face it, Lego 's in a very tough competition on different markets around the world. they may have a decent market share here in europe and they most defenitely have a good brand, but they're not the biggest toy producers in the world. they need to watch out for any threat what soever...

[Joebot]

I dont know about you guys but im sick of these lego license's. Lets have a quick look

Star Wars

Disney

Avatar

Sponge Bob

Indiana Jones (possible)

Harry Potter

Thomas & Friends

Bob the Builder

Batman

Spider Man

Jurassic Park/Steven Spielberg

In your list of licenses, you forgot the one that best proved your point -- Galidor. Unless that's under the Disney license?? Not sure about that. But anyway, man, what a trainwreck THAT theme was. I remember seeing those action figures on deep clearance at TRU. They couldn't give those stupid things away.

Licenses seem like a necessary evil in the toy industry these days. There's just no way around it. I think Lego has realized that they went too far down that path. I think there's a balance that can be reached between licensed and non-licensed properties, and it seems like Lego is experimenting to find that balance. I'd like to see them focus on a handful of strong core brands, then use the rest of their line to promote their own products.

I agree with the above posters who have been disappointed with the Batman theme. The sets have been pretty cool, but I'm just not sure where we're headed. Is there any longetivity to this theme? Or are this years' two sets going to the end of it??

[snefroe]

In your list of licenses, you forgot the one that best proved your point -- Galidor. Unless that's under the Disney license?? Not sure about that. But anyway, man, what a trainwreck THAT theme was. I remember seeing those action figures on deep clearance at TRU. They couldn't give those stupid things away.

Licenses seem like a necessary evil in the toy industry these days. There's just no way around it. I think Lego has realized that they went too far down that path. I think there's a balance that can be reached between licensed and non-licensed properties, and it seems like Lego is experimenting to find that balance. I'd like to see them focus on a handful of strong core brands, then use the rest of their line to promote their own products.

I agree with the above posters who have been disappointed with the Batman theme. The sets have been pretty cool, but I'm just not sure where we're headed. Is there any longetivity to this theme? Or are this years' two sets going to the end of it??

crappy themes are not enterily related to licenses. lego produced a bunch of dreadfull themes of their own... :-X

[natelite]

Someone brought up the topic of lego in china, which I find interesting (since china is the hottest news these days).

Now, here is my take on this subject. There are way too many knockoffs in china at the moment but it's definitely a ground which lego wants to thread lightly. They can't afford to go in too early since they cannot compete on price and relatively few people in china knows about lego, so brand name accounts for almost nothing. If they go in too early and ended up not selling anything, it will be disasterous for its brand as it will need to liquidate its operation (and inventory) and become known as a failure both for its set and brand name.

But if they stay too long from that market, it will also be disasterous. If one of those knockoffs got off to developing a reputation for its brand (ie climb up the tech chain, make better plastics, better designs, etc), it may become even bigger than lego. In which case, the KO will begin to compete with TLG in the international market, and may even replace TLG as the no 1 choice with consumers globally.

Case in point: Haier. It is still currently a wannabe consumer electrical products manufacturer. But we are seeing that it competes with korean/us manufacturers (LG, Fridgeaire, etc) in the us market these days. In china, it is the largest and most reputable brand name, surpassing even japanese brands (Toshiba, Panasonic/National). And in the us market it is rapidly gaining market share due to warehouse retailers carrying its brand (eg, Target, Home Depot). And we know as soon as you "conquer" the US market, the brand name will build itself over time.

----------------------------

Now on the topic of licensing: I think I'm on board with the group that says it's a waste of time/effort except for SW. I think that's mostly because of the lack of a need for either army building or large flagships or vehicles. Spiderman, batman, avatar, spongebob all have limited characters in them and a lack of need for army building. Sw on the other hand, lots of vehicles, spaceships, huge universe and large need to army build.

All of the successful themes have centered on either evolution (bionicle, EF - new year = new sets, city), or army building (castle, sw, etc). Unfortunately, all the licenced products have limited evolution (one batmobile, one batcopter) and no army building (how many batmen or spidermen do you need?)

So having said that, I think they should focus licenced products on army building themes, like LOTR, narnia, tarabithia, etc. (sorry, can't think of sci-fi army building themes).

edit: I just thought of a good licenced theme TLG can venture into. Buzz lightyear and the star command. Simple theme, yet holds potential for army building. Will be popular with kids and afol alike. :-P

[Athos]

I'm not so much sick of licenses, as I am of flesh figures and extensive/excessive remakes of the same item over and over again (X-wing, Y-wing, AT-ST, Snowspeeder, Hagrid's Hut, etc.). At least with Hogwarts, the sets have been different looking enough to warrant remakes and you can combine them into a super-Hogwarts. And don't get me started on the ridiculous number TIE fighters... at least a dozen... :-X

Steve